Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...

Posts: 19,402

Local Time: 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar I just think that if it may help one person to understand it may be worth while.

Yeah. As I've said before, we can't do anything about intolerance until we understand why those people are intolerant, and the only way we can do that is by allowing those who hold intolerant views to express them. I don't agree at all with the views of racists, homophobes, sexist people, and so on, but I'm sorry, their views still deserve to be heard. They are entitled to freedom of speech, too, along with all those who think opposite of them.

Quote:

Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastarWell yes everyone is entitled to their opinion, but you bring nothing to the discussion when you can't bring any reasoning, evidence, or logic to the debate. This is what irks me the most in this forum is when individuals pipe in on a debate and state nothing but their opinion. I know many of the discussion in this board are based on emotion, but you can't just come out and say "Well I just hate Bush thats why", tell me why you hate Bush. I don't know, does that make sense, is that asking too much?

Originally posted by Moonlit_Angel Yeah. As I've said before, we can't do anything about intolerance until we understand why those people are intolerant, and the only way we can do that is by allowing those who hold intolerant views to express them. I don't agree at all with the views of racists, homophobes, sexist people, and so on, but I'm sorry, their views still deserve to be heard. They are entitled to freedom of speech, too, along with all those who think opposite of them.

Intolerance is a two way street. We toss the word around when we want to paint another point of view into a corner. We can righteously slap all the labels we want on the views with which we disagree; the result is stagnated discussion.

If there is to be only one way to view a subject, it should be noted in the description of the forum and left at that.

I say any subject can be discussed civily if the basis for the views are intelligently described. This goes for all "taboo" subjects such as denial of the holocost, biological superiority of race or gender, etc.

Originally posted by FizzingWhizzbees I don't buy the idea that someone should be allowed to make homophobic comments as long as they do so politely, it's the equivalent of saying it's acceptable to claim black people are inferior to white people just as long as you're polite about it.

And I do not think anyone would ever get away with a comment like that.

There are people who are not homophobic, racist, ect...who have opinions that they can express without saying anything like this. They too can be good people. My point is too often good people are labeled in here when they express themsleves as being such.

the mod team has no intent to play kindergarten teachers over FYM
we never have and we probably never will if only because we haven't got the time to do so

thicker skin will indeed be necessary since we're also not willing to let bickering have too big a place in FYM
the thing about thicker skin is that it will solely be up to the members to make FYM work and not the mod team

1st I do not think ANYONE expects the mods to play kindergarten teachers. You do a great job...and I do not think that is in question.

Thicker skin is necessary. Starting with me, I could use it too.

The best things that I have seen in FYM are people who see through partisan politics and come to the defense and aid of people on the opposite side of the fence. I am most proud of the people who, despite their politics, somehow can see through it and befriend people. I see that most especially in Verte and Klaus.

I disagree that it is too difficult to create an email account. I have an email account for the FYM fantasy baseball league through Yahoo. It is not difficult, and it is easy enough to access. I do not have to even go there unless someone lets me know I am there.

As far as AIM ect...I never said that it was necessary, however, there were members that I got along much better with when they communicated with me through AIM. AIM has restrictions on the PM's you can receive. It is simple enough to block and not allow people to access you. Example...only the people I allow to see me can. No one can create an account and see if I am online or PM me. It takes seconds to set it up. By the way, if you are someone I PM'd in the past and you have not spoken with me in a while, I miss ya!

Why I disagree with publishing e-mail addresses is that they will lead to spam. Guaranteed. I also don't want my e-mail address published for everyone to see, and I don't want another e-mail address to be forced to check. In fact, I think people who open new free accounts 9 times out of 10 will never look at it again. Including myself.

Originally posted by melon
[B] I did not come here to Interference to see a major part of me be put up for debate like it is some anthropological antiquity at a regular basis. And then, when I defend myself, I get PMed for being too abrasive to all you people. Well, what do you fucking expect? I'm supposed to just sit back and be more "thick skinned" to accomodate all the ignorant and bigoted homophobic comments in here, while *I* am supposed to be nice?!.

I have not walked in your shoes and I would expect that your view of the topic would be extremely different from others. I would expect you to react exactly the way you feel. I admire and respect you for it.

[Q]I'm really, quite honestly, exhausted, after four years of writing "enlightening" comments about the issue. I'm glad to read that some people here have gotten something out of it all these years, but I'm just tired of repeating myself. I don't care if people think that Jesus hates gay people or if you think the leprechaun under your bed hates gay people either. [/Q]

I think that most of the posters in here have presented their case respectfully on this issue. While you and I are on the opposite side of the issue from them, I still feel that the members of FYM have accepted who you are and understand it is not pleasant for you to hear their point of view. I also have to say in defense of almost all of the regulars who post in FYM, they have never, to my knowledge said that Jesus hates you. Again, you and I may not agree with their interpretation of the scriptures, and that my firend is a battle we will never win, but that does not mean that they cannot express their viewpoint.

[Q]I don't care! I have my reasons, and I also consider myself Christian. I also came from a liberal / radical Catholic background, meaning that my more scholarly approach to religion is inherent to my belief system. I have my reasons to living my life the way I do, and I did not come here to read nearly incessantly offensive comments. Like I said, if it is not okay to be offensive to women, to people of other races, or to Jews / Muslims, then it is NOT OKAY to be offensive to homosexuals. Period.[/Q]

I have been labled many things since my journey on the internet brought me to FYM. I have been labled offensive to women, other religions, and homophobic. None of which I believe true in my heart. You and I have very similar backgrounds from what I can read.....and it is probably why I admire your posts so much. I do have a problem labeling someone as anything from their posts in FYM unless they are blatently overt in their comments. For the most part, I think people should feel free to post ideas and thoughts without fear of being labeled.

[Q]Other than this subject, I think that FYM has been moderated well. We have been very good at debating "impersonal" topics, like religion, politics, science, etc.--topics that do not go to the core of who we are. But when we start debating whether one class of people are inherently evil or not, then that's where I have problems, and I am across the board on this.[/Q]

And on this we agree. Topics that are personal to us, and hit too close to home cause the most difficulty. I cannot immagine putting myself in your shoes, coming in here, and asking you to bite your toungue when you see something that bothers you. However, and If I am wrong on this correct me, but I have not ever seen you call someone a biggot or anything of the sort. I think there is a difference in the way in which people can try an educate someone about their point of view, and flat out calling them a biggot. I think you do an admirable job.

[Q]be my reply here is a bit harsh, but this is what I see in here. For the most part, I think this forum is very well moderated.

We wont be requiring people to give out their IM details or email addresses any time soon. Our format for communicating is the forum. We can contact any of you guys through your profiles and you can get to any of the mods through our emails in our signatures. As always anyone who wants to volunteer their contact details is welcome to do so, but it will not become a requirement.
Making FYM exclusive is not going to solve the problem of what issues have arisen.

The problem of people maybe needing thicker skin has come up because often viewpoints clash. Who's do we protect? Can we seperate them and make one more important than the other?

Originally posted by nbcrusader
I say any subject can be discussed civily if the basis for the views are intelligently described. This goes for all "taboo" subjects such as denial of the holocost, biological superiority of race or gender, etc.

Quote:

Originally posted by Moonlit_Angel
Yeah. As I've said before, we can't do anything about intolerance until we understand why those people are intolerant, and the only way we can do that is by allowing those who hold intolerant views to express them. I don't agree at all with the views of racists, homophobes, sexist people, and so on, but I'm sorry, their views still deserve to be heard. They are entitled to freedom of speech, too, along with all those who think opposite of them.

Quote:

Originally posted by melon
However, when it comes to issues of homosexuality, I understand that the moderating / admin team isn't necessarily anti-gay, and I never wish to imply that. I think it is a matter of cultural conditioning; we still think it to be "normal" to question it, as if it were a anthropological antiquity and we expect the "religious" to start thumping irrational homophobic lines. However, I argue that if it isn't okay to be anti-Semitic, if it isn't okay to be misogynist, if it isn't okay to be racist, then it isn't okay to be homophobic. Period. If there were ever meaningful or rational discussion on this subject, then I wouldn't be writing this thread. But when all the arguments against it revolve around prejudice-tainted pseudoscience or religious arguments, that's why the subject is as offensive as any of the other taboos above.

Of course, maybe what I argue is 20 years down the road. It was difficult enough getting society to stop arguing that blacks were genetically inferior to whites. I guess it will take an equally long time to get people to stop arguing that homosexuals are genetically inferior as well. Whatever. People can believe what they want; just keep their prejudices out of this forum in the same manner we'd do to racists or anti-Semites.

As uncomfortable as many of these issues may make me, I feel it is necessary to allow the discussion of them in a forum devoted to the discussion of politics, spirituality, religion and world events. I think it's important to realize that various opinions, as offensive as they are, do exist, and do exist in people that are a lot like "us". If you never talk about these issues, how are you to know how widespread they are? I guess I just feel it is important to know what people are thinking about sensitive subjects, and perhaps be able to counter them and give a differing opinion.

Melon, I won't say that I understand your frustration, because not being in the same situation I can't, but I will say that I appreciate your viewpoint and especially your willingness to risk ridicule to state it. It's important that people are exposed to what you have to say. It's important that people understand just how unreasonable their arguments condeming homosexuality really are, or at the very least that their views are not universal.
My father destroyed his life and hurt his family terribly because he believed the vitriol spewed by homophobes. He turned that hatred inward to the point that he believed that everyone that was part of him was worthless. I'd like to believe that through open, honest discussion, other people won't have to suffer the anguish he and his family (including me) have had to face.

I feel that reasonable moderation can help keep nastiness in check, yet still allow for discussion of uncomfortable issues. Closing threads should be done as a last resort, but the occasional "cool it" post from a moderator might be handy. I've also posted in other forums where a thread is closed of a day or two and people are allowed to cool off and then the thread is reopened, allowing for continued, more orderly discussion. It really does work (well...most of the time). I do think threads are sometimes closed a little too quickly here, I've read through some closed ones and wondered why they got locked. Maybe I'm really thick, but often the closed threads don't even come close to what I would consider closeable (and I do moderate at another bulletin board, so I don't think I'm totally clueless).

As for "taking it off board" via email, PMing, chat, etc., I have done that before on the other board I mention above. This can work, but it also can be problematic. Since I am a moderator on this other board, I don't feel that I can always openly speak my mind when there is a personal attack on me (it happens), so I have contacted people by email or talked to them in the chat room frequented by members of that board to discuss the issue (s). Sometimes this works well, one of my best "board friendships" came out of several chat sessions after a particularly testy board discussion.

But other times it hasn't worked so well. I make a point that touchy issues I discuss in the chat room or in private emails stay there and don't get transferred to the boards, but I have had the person I was talking to feel that it was the perfect opportunity to smear me. So I find nasty little comments (quite twisted too) about me posted on a public bulletin board, and because I won't discuss it there, the poster who smeared me gets the last word (posts are extremely rarely deleted by anyone other than the original poster). Another point to consider when taking something off board is that emails etc. can get very ugly very fast! Sometimes it's best to keep the discussion out in public view.

Originally posted by U2Kitten Yes, but does it still charge when the thread is not being viewed?

No, when the thread is not being viewed, then there's no charge. Since no one is watching it, there's no transfer of the pictures thus no bandwith is being used. It's just like with electricity or water. As long as the tap in your kitchen is closed there's no transfer of water. The water is still available, but as long as you don't use it, you won't get charged for it.

Location: on a one of these small green spots at that blue planet at the end of the milky way

Posts: 2,432

Local Time: 07:15 PM

Moonlit_Angel:

Quote:

As I've said before, we can't do anything about intolerance until we understand why those people are intolerant

Exactly and those people who are intolerant might have no clue how f***ed up their view of the world is if they are not allowed to discuss it in a civil manner.
But as mentioned on the 1st posting:
I think it's more important that people who feel offended and personally attacked because of postings (even if the question was written in a civil manner) are protected by the mods.
I really miss the view of some christians who were former members of FYM and couldn't stand the attacks against their belief anymore.
Of course nbcrusader is right and there is a danger that people can play the "I'm so offended card" to censorship debates they don't like.

So all i can do now is to repeat a statement of my 1st posting. The mods are doing a great job here.

U2Kitten:
no the bandwith is only charged when the image is accessed by someone.
So 1 person looks at it:
Traffic = 1x the size of the picture
0 persons:
Traffic = 0
1000 persons look at that picture
1000x the size of the picture.

indra:
Temporarely closing a thread sounds like an excelent idea to me.
Threads about torture or the first beheadings for example. Many people might have said things in the first hours they would never ever have said a few days later.

Angela Harlem:
i can't see any signatures - is it a configuration problem or a "premium member service"?
As i said before restricting pms to 2/week would be best. Imho there isn't even a technical solution necessary.
If a non-premium member abuses pms a mod can warn them - if he continues to abuse them you can delete their account.

Originally posted by Salome at least a healthy part of the mod team also agrees with melon's comments

but what does that mean though?
that threads about homosexuality should be forbidden?
that we delete every post that appears to have homophobic content?

Personally I'd be happy enough if we never had another thread discussing homosexuality. I think almost everything that could possible be said has already been said and I get tired of seeing the same old homophobic arguments posted again and again.

However, as long as there are such discussions, I think the mods need to keep in mind that for many of us, making homophobic comments is every bit as offensive as making racist or anti-semitic comments. I very much doubt that anyone would be warned for calling someone who posted racist comments a racist, but it seems to be a different story when talking about homophobic comments. Often those of us who criticize people for making homophobic remarks find that the mods warn us for our response while ignoring the comments that provoked the response.

I think if the mods are going to allow people to make homophobic comments then they also need to allow those of us who are offended to respond appropriately. Too many people hide behind the "I'm not homophobic but I think what gay people do is wrong" argument (which has about as much credibility as "I'm not racist but you can't deny black people are genetically inferior") and I don't think it's fair that people feel able to make whatever homophobic comments they like and then use that claim as a shield against any form of criticism.

U2Kitten:
no the bandwith is only charged when the image is accessed by someone.
So 1 person looks at it:
Traffic = 1x the size of the picture
0 persons:
Traffic = 0
1000 persons look at that picture
1000x the size of the picture.